When a Fly Falls into a Cup of Coffee: International Style

The Italian – throws the cup, breaks it and walks away in a fit of rage.

The German – carefully washes the cup, sterilizes it and makes a new cup of coffee.

The Frenchman – takes out the fly and drinks the coffee.

The Chinese – eats the fly and throws away the coffee.

The Russian – drinks the coffee with the fly, since it came with no extra charge.

The Israeli – sells the coffee to the Frenchman, sells the fly to the Chinese, sells the cup to the Italian, drinks a cup of tea and uses the extra money to invent a device that prevents flies from falling into coffee.

The Palestinian – blames the Israeli for the fly falling into his coffee, protests the act to the UN as an act of aggression, takes a loan from the European Union to buy a new cup of coffee, uses the money to purchase explosives and then blows up the coffee house where the Italian, Frenchman, Chinese, German and Russian are all trying to explain to the Israeli that he should give his cup of tea to the Palestinian.

54 Responses to When a Fly Falls into a Cup of Coffee: International Style

Palestinians? Since when? They are Egyptian and Syrian. They even say so openly on Egyptian and Syrian TV. But their propaganda is so effective that even you, Richard, are a victim of their brainwashing.

“Yes, I am your master. Keep following me, like a good doggie farter.”

“Very good, doggie. You are such a nice puppy. I´m so proud of you.”

“Nice little puppy, you are. Good little farter.”

“I´m your leader, right? And you are like a faithful muslim. Nice.” (i guess that some latent supremacism came to the surface, hence SerJew temporarily saw me as his obedient Muslim, not as his obedient dog).

“Awww, little doggy farter lost the game…”

“Yes, you are a total loser, dog.”

“Oh, good, the little slave dog is typing.”

“You are taking too long, farting dog. TYPE FASTER!”

My only additional observation is that you seem to have a predilection for gaseous emissions by your slave-dog (Muslim or otherwise, i am only guessing though).

And here is what i have to say: i refuse to play this S/M game with you. But, in case you somehow manage to locate me and, under the threat of physical violence, put me in a room where you can do to me what you want to do to Muslims, i have a plea to make: please don’t harm me and i will even dress up in traditional Muslim outfit as you no doubt wish. But, SerJew, please try to understand that it is kind of impossible for me to satisfy you on demand as far as the gaseous emissions are concerned: these things happen on their own, only when nature calls, you can’t force them.

I thank you in advance for your understanding.

SerJew said:

“Go eat your grass.”

By now i know that you love to give orders – but i suggest you try it in a less threatening fashion, such as “dionissis, why don’t you go eat your grass?”.

Normal people tend to be afraid of personalities like yours, you don’t need to be so revealing of your deeper self in everything you say.

Keep believing that there’s a difference between Democrats and Republicans, Commies and Fascists, KGB and CIA, etc. They are ALL snakes from the same Medusa. Keep believing their propaganda script and idiotic theater. I really don’t care about you believe. What I do care about is your incivility your insults and your rudeness. Your comments as such, SerJew, should be removed.

Good grief! So, on one side we have Mika Meshugannah, a conspiracy lunatic giving moral lessons. On other side, a spineless vegganite and part-time psycho-anal-ist that is so pathetic that he uses this blog to whine about a fight he had with me at another blog some months ago: don´t you have a shred of self-respect?

In any case, happy new year and I´ll leave you two fools to each other; I bet the crickets will be enticed by your wisdom (sooner the Voegelin-quoter will surely join in).

Enjoy!

PS to Richard: I´m reading your book.

PS to the spineless dude: I´m waiting you at EoZ; come along and let me have more fun at your expense.

Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security Fathi Hammad Slams Egypt over Fuel Shortage in Gaza Strip, and Says: “Half of the Palestinians Are Egyptians and the Other Half Are Saudis”

Following are excerpts from an address by Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security Fathi Hammad, aired by Al-Hekma TV on March 23, 2012.

Fathi Hammad : Is Egypt incapable of supplying fuel for 1.5 to 2 million people in the Gaza Strip?

[…]

If you do not point your compass toward Palestine, Al-Aqsa, and Jerusalem, in order to uproot the Zionist enemy, the US will trample you underfoot. It will besiege you with its conspiracies and will finish you off.

Therefore, you must hoist the banner of Jihad, the banner of “there is no god but Allah.”

[…]

Brothers, there are 1.8 million of us in Gaza. In Egypt, there are about 90 million people. We equal merely two percent of the Egyptian population. [Supplying us with fuel] would not burden you at all.

[…]

At Al-Aqsa and on the land of Palestine, all the conspiracies, throughout history, have been shattered – the conspiracies of the Crusaders, and the conspiracies of the Tatars. At Al-Aqsa and on the land of Palestine, the Battle of Hattin was waged. The [West] does not want this noble history to repeat itself, because the Jews and their allies would be annihilated – the Zionists, the Americans, and the imperialists.

Thus, the conspiracy is very clear. Al-Aqsa and the land of Palestine represent the spearhead for Islam and for the Muslims. Therefore, when we seek the help of our Arab brothers, we are not seeking their help in order to eat, to live, to drink, to dress, or to live a life of luxury. No. When we seek their help, it is in order to continue to wage Jihad.

[…]

Allah be praised, we all have Arab roots, and every Palestinian, in Gaza and throughout Palestine, can prove his Arab roots – whether from Saudi Arabia, from Yemen, or anywhere. We have blood ties. So where is your affection and mercy?

[…]

Personally, half my family is Egyptian. We are all like that. More than 30 families in the Gaza Strip are called Al-Masri [“Egyptian”]. Brothers, half of the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis.

Who are the Palestinians? We have many families called Al-Masri, whose roots are Egyptian. Egyptian! They may be from Alexandria, from Cairo, from Dumietta, from the North, from Aswan, from Upper Egypt. We are Egyptians. We are Arabs. We are Muslims. We are a part of you.

Allah Akbar. All praise to Allah. Allah Akbar. How can you keep silent, oh Muslims, when the people of Gaza are dying? You watch from the sidelines without providing them with the simplest thing, which you give to the West for the most meager price.

“Good grief! So, on one side we have Mika Meshugannah, a conspiracy lunatic giving moral lessons.”

Yes, Mika the “conspiracy lunatic” that you felt like attacking without any provocation, other than your need to gain some self-esteem. Your first comment to him was sheer derision. And in a very dignified way Mika subsequently asked you to be civil. He wasn’t giving you a moral lesson, it was more like a lesson in manners.

As an aside, do you really think it’s a good idea to call Mika a “lunatic” after what you inadvertently revealed about your psychology when you were expressing your domineering self?

I mean, what, the pot calling the kettle…”dog”?

“On other side, a spineless vegganite”

That’s me you are referring to.

There’s nothing wrong with vegetarianism – it’s actually caring for animal suffering. Only people burdened with your own syndromes would see vegetarians as contemptible.

“and part-time psycho-anal-ist”

I’ve told you in the past, i know nothing about psychology. It’s just you who is so transparent. Does one need a psychology degree to realize that your desperate attempt at a supposedly hurtful pun against me (“anal”) shows in this context the need of a suppressed sadist to save face? – not to say anything about the cheapness of it.

“that is so pathetic that he uses this blog to whine about a fight he had with me at another blog some months ago:

Not months. Something like 2 months, really.

But we are both regular commenters in here, and you have just showed up here for the first time since then, and disputes should always be resolved, one way or another. Look what happened to you who left unresolved past issues in your life: you need to dominate to feel good.

“don´t you have a shred of self-respect?”

This is the question one naturally asks of you, if one sees both the revealing fit of domination-anger that possessed you in repeatedly needing to see me as your dog, and the fact that the next day you felt it was business as usual: not even a reluctant acknowledging of having behaved like a barbarian.

Am i missing something, or have you just unconsciously asked yourself this question about shreds of self respect? And do you really need a psychology degree to realize that?

“PS to the spineless dude:”

SerJew, my purported spinelessness is preferable to your supremacism any day. Come and think of it, anything is preferable to it.

“I´m waiting you at EoZ;”

I don’t really feel visiting that blog anymore. Too much moral filth in its comment sections – and an almost murderious supremacism that, unbelievably, gets tolerated by the Elder of Ziyon, the blog owner. So the sexism and the homophobia that are also prevalent there are kind of misdemeanors, i am forced to admit. I’ll indulge you though partially and show up some time – but it won’t be to talk to you. Give my best to Elder.

“come along and let me have more fun at your expense.”

You didn’t sound at all like having fun with me when i was talking to you. When you need to call someone your dog to make yourself feel worthwhile, then you are furthest removed from any kind of emotion that can be construed as amusement. Actually, you had said i was “stalking” you – signifying a desire to be away from me (away from the truths i was disseminating about yourself, really).

But seeing that you pretend to be so eager to confront me, i say here will do ok. Why not have some more “fun” at my expense here?

Afraid that the only way you know of having “fun” cannot be tolerated in normal blogs such as this one here?

Ts ts ts. SerJew, that’s part of what civilization is all about: finding ways of having fun that allow for the preservation of civil society.

DM, it’s obvious that “SerJew” is somewhat unhinged. His kind of stunts one could expect from a cornered and desperate teenager, but my guess is that “SerJew” is much much older than a teenager, which makes his behavior doubly pathetic.

Mr SerJew,
could you consider this puzzle? Let’s say that conspiracies are as seldom found as dodo birds. But how was the “Protocols of the Wise Elders of Zion” produced? Was it a group or one man who brought together the excerpts plagiarized from Maurice Joly’s Dialogue aux enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu [Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu][ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dialogue_in_Hell_Between_Machiavelli_and_Montesquieu ]
and from several other sources and made various adjustments to try to make the text look like the minutes of a Jewish secret society, thus producing the Protocols? How about how the Protocols were first disseminated in Russia? Was it one man or a group that saw to it that this text of motley parts was published and spread?

In fact, I can´t answer straightforwardly to your interesting and petulant questions because I´m currently working as secretary-adjutant to the upcoming meeting of the Elders of Zion, to be held at the old Jewish cemetery in the outskirts of Prague, Golem St. no. 666. But I can reveal a little secret: Mika Meshugannah is on our side (but maybe he isn´t).

Many thanks for your interest in our conspiracy business. Do not hesitate to contact us in the future: we´ll be glad to misinform you as usual.

Regards.

PS: The Sanhedrim is preparing a jubilee edition of the Protocols and maybe you could contribute with some additional material.

Is the Israeli really going to invest the extra money to invent a device that prevents flies from falling into coffee? I don’t believe that! In all likelihood he will be forced to invest the extra money in a defensive wall to prevent the Palestinians from blowing up the coffee house. (I’m sorry, I couldn’t find a Voegelin quote on this one, although he has interesting things to say on the ‘grotesque’.)

Martin, you’re another who fell victim to the Israeli gov mafia CIA/CFR propaganda. The “wall” is not to keep the “Arabs” out, that is impossible. They are already in, in the millions, so that is complete propaganda. And more and more of them are coming in for free medical services and such at the economic (and health**) expense of Israeli tax payers. (**For every Arab being treated at an Israeli hospital or clinic, that’s an Israeli that’s not being treated and has to wait to be treated. And we’re talking about hundreds of thousand of cases a year, with more and more each year). So no, the “wall” is designed to keep Israelis from Judea and Samaria. The “wall” was built as a psychological construct, as a psychological barrier, as much as it is a physical barrier.

Sure. It looks like a mighty barrier though, that must give Israeli security forces somewhat better (less costly) means to watch who comes in and brings what with him. But all this started from a joke, and my joke was on the Jew not being so stupid to put his money into anti-fly devices that undermine his own business! (Competition, of course, will eventually lead to that, which is the reassuring part missing from the joke.) – About the wall: when you hear Westerners talk about the wall (and I think I saw some documentary on the BBC by some highly emotional famous British journalist whose name escapes me), what strikes me is that they completely forget that a wall can just as easily be torn down again as it was built up. A wall is just a wall, nothing to get excited about. The reasons that led to its construction are what matters. Forgetting that is what Voegelin calls the “the character of the grotesque attaching to the deformation of humanity through the climate of opinion”. (I got my Voegelin quote in, at last!)

The ..”grotesque attaching to the deformation of humanity through the climate of opinion”.. is done by the gov mafia and its propaganda outlets, counting on the fact that 80% of the population are nothing but propaganda parrots and slavish automatons devoid of any capacity for mental resistance and independent analysis.

My point is that the Israeli gov mafia, contrary to its pathetic theater and empty gestures, is a full partner to the Vatican/CIA propaganda — its “NGOs” and media outlets — and is a long standing enabler of anti-Israeli propaganda. In other words, our supposed government mafia controlling our various institutions is NOT our government at all. It is a puppet government selected by its Vatican/CIA handlers to be completely subservient to its Vatican/CIA handlers.

The bombing of Israelis which supposedly precipitated the construction of the “wall” was an inside job. The Jihadistani bombers were enabled in their campaign by our Israeli gov mafia. The Israeli gov mafia needed the wall built, because those were their orders from their Vatican/CIA handlers. They allowed the bombers to proceed, often times giving the Jihadistani bombers tactical information to aid their mission of mass murder and terror, so that the excuse could be manufactured for building the “wall”.

It was an inside job. Just like 9/11 was an inside job, allowing for the excuse for a more tyrannical fascist nazi-Vatican/CIA regime on the American slave plantation.

What strange bedfellows this blog attracts… So many mediocre blogs on the zioshphere and yet the cooks end up assembling davka at the most academically oriented one. Which is a damn shame, since the comment section used to be almost as informative and engaging as the posts themselves…

I had (in effect) asked you what the term “davka” means, because you had used this term in your previous comment that in all probability was referring to me (among other commenters in here).

It is inconsiderate to speak about present commenters in languages they don’t understand, and you have already done it twice – i don’t know what “wudja” means either.

You said this in your previous comment:

sshender said:

“So many mediocre blogs on the zioshphere and yet the cooks end up assembling davka at the most academically oriented one.”

Since you don’t explain what “davka” means, and since your comment sounds contemptuous about my contributions to this blog, i need to inform you that Dr Landes has praised publicly my contributions to this blog in the past. So, if you have any complaint about the quality of my comments, i suggest you take it up with him.

Were you making the point that “mediocre” people (presumably like me, according to you) should only visit mediocre blogs?

If yes, i can fully understand why you didn’t even bother to declare that you are not a bedfellow with supremacists like SerJew.

sshender is right, Dionissis, just put a cork in it, will you? He vastly exaggerates though, there aren’t that many strange bedfellows polluting the comment section with off-topic rants, just a few, and it’s not sure they are the reason why other commenters stay away. – The reason why I was attracted to the blog was not so much its academic quality, but more the not so academic ideas about the working (and failing) of a civil society or polity. And I think I suggested to Richard that we should do more of the ‘Open Letter to Jostein Gaarder’ kind of thing, writing our part of a dialogue by talking to people, rather than talking about people in the endless debate that is going on in so many fora already. – Eric Voegelin about the mass media as a huge obstacle for the spiritual and political regeneration of the West (in 1959): “Hier sehe ich das Haupthindernis organisatorischer Art für eine Wiederbelebung: Daß das, was vorhanden ist und sich entwickeln könnte, im Massenbetrieb – zwar nicht immer bösartig, sondern durch das reine Gewicht der Massenkommunikation, die Schlechtes und Gutes gleichmäßig behandelt – erstickt wird.” That’s Robert Musil’s idea about ‘newspapers’ that could be laboratories of the human spirit, but end up being no more than bazars trading in everything that is available, literally destroying what is valuable by simply drowning it in the mass of what is not so valuable.

And Philip Greenspun’s book review of “Start-up Nation: The Story of Israel’s Economic Miracle” (excerpt):

«Suppose that there were a much simpler explanation for all of this? How about the following:

– Israel is not home to a lot of huge successful international companies. There is nothing comparable to Samsung in Israel (Samsung is 10X the size of Teva, Israel’s biggest company).
– The Arab Boycott of Israel prevents the development of successful regional companies.
– Israel got lucky when a lot of Russian Jews wanted to migrate and were not able to get into the U.S. or Western Europe (see my Israel article from 2003).
– These Russians and their well-educated children couldn’t find good jobs in a big company, so they started a lot of new companies in hopes of selling their labor (by selling the companies) to U.S. and Western Europe without moving physically to those countries.

If this is the correct explanation then there is pretty much nothing that can be learned from the success of some Israeli start-ups. You have smart well-educated people who are blocked for political and practical reasons from moving somewhere else. There are practical and political impediments to Israeli companies growing huge, which creates a relatively more favorable environment for small companies.»

“[commenter] sshender is right, Dionissis, just put a cork in it, will you?”

I was minding my own business, and it was commenter sshender that showed up and criticized me. Which is perfectly ok, but he can’t very well ask me to “shut up” when it is he who first addressed me.

“He vastly exaggerates though, there aren’t that many strange bedfellows polluting the comment section with off-topic rants, just a few, and it’s not sure they are the reason why other commenters stay away.”

Considering that you have just asked me to “put a cork in it”, it might sound to other commenters (or the audience) like your comment about “strange bedfellows polluting the comment section with off-topic rants” refers to me too. I know that you didn’t mean it about me and i understood that both this sentence and your “sshender is right” was gentle sarcasm against sshender and that your comment was a polite defense of yourself against sshender’s allegations, but do you mind clarifying that you were not referring to me concerning the “off-topic rants”? People there are who will misinterpret your comment, and think of me God knows what, especially in light of what commenter sshender has written.

It’s really pathetic that some here are so threatened by the various comments that they would resort to silence those comments and commentators. This behaviour is now rampant in academia which has become a kind of religious priesthood for the establishment mafia and their propaganda, exhibiting exactly the same attributes and tactics of the Vatican inquisition and the feudal Roman dark ages. What they did to Immanuel Velikovsky, a great thinker and scholar and a good friend of Einstein’s, is absolutely scandalous.

I was indeed meaning you (and Mika and SerJew) by the “few” who are indulging in off-topic rants that are of no interest to anybody but themselves! You shouldn’t be so worried about what people think of you, you should know by yourself what to think of you. And if you do, you will understand that I never meant to say that all your comments are off-topic rants. Because not all are. Richard obviously has no time for moderating comments. But it is his (and his intended readers’) blog. Everybody should respect that. (This reply is already one too many, so here it stops for me.)

Martin, who are you to decide what is or isn’t “off topic”? This fascistic arrogance to censor people which you display is unbelievable. MD is probably the best contributor here. S/He is fair, articulate, sensitive, polite, undogmatic, and extremely perceptive — none of which applies to you and the other inquisitors that post here.

“I was indeed meaning you (and Mika and SerJew) by the “few” who are indulging in off-topic rants that are of no interest to anybody but themselves!”

This then means that you are a liar. This was just the second time i had ever come into a personal dispute with a commenter – the first was with you, so i can understand your present vindictiveness, but i cannot excuse your inaccurate way of presenting me as engaging in off-topic discussions (“rants”, no less) systematically. As i have said, Dr Landes has praised my comments in the past, which means you don’t know what you are talking about with regards to the quality of my comments.

“You shouldn’t be so worried about what people think of you, you should know by yourself what to think of you.”

I am not “worried” about what people will think of me. But this does not mean that i will let a lie such as the one you spouted about my comments pass unchallenged. I don’t need emotional turbulence (such as sentiments of worry) to motivate me to protect my credibility, pure reason does the motivational trick just as fine.

“And if you do, you will understand that I never meant to say that all your comments are off-topic rants.”

Almost everyone would have interpreted your comment as meaning that i am lots of times engaging in comments which are off topic, which is a slander about me, as Dr Landes’ commendations of some of my past comments show. You should be careful how you phrase your self when you are talking about the quality of other people’s past contributions.

“Because not all [comments of yours] are.”

And here it becomes clear what a liar you are. You want to let hang in the air that an unspecified but substantial number of my comments are “off-topic”, despite the fact that my comments not only do they pertain to the major concerns of this blog, but have also been praised by the owner of this blog, Dr Richard Landes.

“Richard obviously has no time for moderating comments.”

He certainly has had time to praise past comments of mine, as i have been repeating ad nauseam so that i won’t let your slander stick into readers’ minds.

“But it is his (and his intended readers’) blog. Everybody should respect that.”

All the indications are that Dr Landes finds the time to moderate comments, as there have been numerous interventions of his in past disputes among commenters, and he has also praised my comments.

What you should be respecting is the actual truth about my comments, a truth evidenced by Dr Landes’ explicit welcoming of past comments of mine, but you are not respecting this truth.

“(This reply is already one too many, so here it stops for me.)”

Your reply was indeed one too many, considering that it was slanderous about me (and unprovoked). Dr Landes wouldn’t have given me credit for my past comments if what you say about my comments were true.

I’m not deciding what is or isn’t off topic, Mika, the topics decide. And I’m not censoring anybody, as I don’t have Richard’s power to delete annoying off-topic comments. I’m only joining sshender in his complaint about them. Because this blog is different from many others, and better, and we should keep it so. What is or isn’t off topic is indeed an open question, but that doesn’t mean that everything goes. I for myself like to make not so straightforward connections, as in this post, which started from a joke, bringing in the ‘grotesque’, which isn’t to be confused with the humourous or the comic, and then the wall and the excitement it generates as an illustration of the grotesque. I haven’t got very far with the implicit question why the grotesque is often not perceived as such, because it is my impression that everybody just finds the Palestinian character in the joke somewhat funnier than the Italian character.

“That’s Robert Musil’s idea about ‘newspapers’ that could be laboratories of the human spirit, but end up being no more than bazars trading in everything that is available, literally destroying what is valuable by simply drowning it in the mass of what is not so valuable.”
==

The veneer is wearing thin. Newspapers and all the big centralized gov mafia controlled institutions soon will disappear. People are learning that all these gov mafia institutions are perceptual window-dressing to cover and hide true reality — a reality that is fascist tyranny.

[I’m not deciding what is or isn’t off topic, Mika, the topics decide.]

As noted by many others and by myself on this and other occasions you are a SERIAL LIAR. You lie with almost every word your tongue hisses. This I attribute to your long training as a Vatican snake as much as your rotten personality.

[And I’m not censoring anybody, as I don’t have Richard’s power to delete annoying off-topic comments.]

When you tell people to shut up and “put a cork in it”, when you tell people that their comments are off topic, when you take it upon yourself to arbitrarily decide when and what something is and isn’t off topic, you are engaged in censorship. And I don’t need to explain this to you in german or provide you with some vague idiotic Voegelin quote for you to understand this, Martin. A six year old understands this, because that’s how a six year old behaves.

[I’m only joining sshender in his complaint about them. Because this blog is different from many others, and better, and we should keep it so.]

That’s not your job! In fact you have no job here. So take your little Vatican inquisition schtick and shove it.

The Israeli – sells the coffee to the Frenchman, sells the fly to the Chinese, sells the cup to the Italian, drinks a cup of tea and happily pays his taxes to build a defensive wall against the Palestinian intent on blowing up the coffee house where the Italian, Frenchman, Chinese, German and Russian are all trying to explain to the Israeli that he would need no wall if only he gave his cup of tea to the Palestinian.

The Palestinian – blames the Israeli for the fly falling into his coffee, protests the act to the UN as an act of aggression, takes a loan from the European Union to buy a new cup of coffee, uses the money to purchase explosives and train suicide bombers to blow up themselves, whether they get to the coffee house behind the protective wall or not.

I was waiting for your “joke”. I knew it would arrive. That’s how well I know and understand you and your kind, Martin.

The real joke is that such racist “jokes” are only made possible because of the propaganda archetypes presented to us as reality. Which means that those that find such propaganda jokes “funny”, including Richard, are in effect in their own stupidity laughing at themselves. Laughing because of their gullibility as manipulated propaganda stooges, unable to discern how they’re being manipulated through divide & conquer perception propaganda by the gov mafia.

I also found talk about national characters or styles nonsensical, until I had read Eric Voegelin on “National Types of Mind” (1930). Some notes and quotes:

The national mind is the existence of the national polity becoming self-conscious.

Plato (common substance of various types), Comte-Hegel (one development through various types), Spengler (cultural morphology of a common substance or structure).

Democracy and sovereignty of the people: (1) struggle for national sovereignty against pope and emperor (for empire sovereignty is not an issue); (2) struggle for internal participation in power against traditional forms of government.

Crisis of democracy is a misnomer, as there has never been a democracy. And it is now, in the middle of the crisis, that has to be found out what a democracy could be.

“There are as many concepts of democracy as there are nations in the world with distinct beliefs of their own, and if each should insist that its idea of democracy ought to be the basis of an ordered civilization, that poor civilization will be pretty far from being an ordered one.”

“Well-considered national beliefs are but a limit to interstate relations; unreflected ones, as they are current today in Germany, England, France, the United States, Italy, and wherever you want, will put an end to them sooner or later, as they did in 1914.”

“I also found talk about national characters or styles nonsensical, until I had read Eric Voegelin..”
==

Don’t you have an independent mind, Martin? Why this constant infantile need to refer back to Eric Voegelin?

“National character” is nothing but racist mind control propaganda. There is no such thing as “national character”. It is purely a propaganda projection, the sole purpose of which is to make it easier for the international gov mafia to rule over their propagandized slave plantations.

On my independent mind: it’s hard for me to pass judgment on my own mind, but in general I don’t think that learning form others’ well worked out thoughts is proof of a dependent mind. Eric Voegelin is one of those I learned a lot from, and as he is not well known, I permit myself to draw attention to his thoughts whenever I think it’s helpful. Moreover, there is a great affinity between Richard Landes’s concerns (a working civil society and polity, its spiritual foundation, and the Augean Stables of the MSNM undermining it) and Eric Voegelin’s work on the philosophy of history and politics.

“.. a working civil society and polity, its spiritual foundation.. ”
==

That’s the thing, Martin; there NEVER was nor will there EVER be a working civil society and polity or a spiritual foundation, until we recognize the mind control illusions and manipulation techniques for what they are; until will see and understand the shadow gov mafia for what it is.

Our “friends” the Vatican/CIA bankster mafia and their global mass radicalization/Islamization — Sibel Edmonds exposes the CIA’s sponsorship of Turkey’s Islamic movement as well as that in the former USSR republics.

The ring of militant Jihad around Israel and Eastern Orthodox Christianity has only one purpose and aim. It is the same purpose and aim as the ring of Nazis and Commies which they created and sponsored earlier. It is that of theft and genocide.

The American – Demands a new cup of coffee, first secretly marking his cup in case it is returned to him, then demands that the price of the coffee be removed from his bill… and anything else he can bully the waiter into deducting.

Now, people can take this off-topic editorializing for what its worth.

I’ve waited over a month to share that little bit of what passes for my humor. I waited that long because I didn’t want to get in the middle the flame battle at the top of the page. God alone knows now if anyone will bother to scroll down far enough trough this thread to read it.

God and our host know I’ve lost my cool on this forum before, but the rancor which is habitually displayed by a couple of regular commenters here is really off-putting, I don’t like getting in the middle of it, and hate when I get sucked into it, and I certainly don’t like having anything I have to say framed by it.

People who read this blog and do not comment here, people we will never know or see – the NSA too apparently – are forming opinions about us, this blog, and our host based upon our comments. It would be great if everyone could act a little more civilly. Things get off track very quickly, as they did in this case, when the very first comment concludes with an ad hominem.

Wygart hi. In this discussion i have been slandered by Martin Malliet and by commenter sshender. Given the vague nature of their slander, it is conceivable that some readers might read your admonitions to commenters to be more civil as including me. Also, “the rancor displayed by a couple of regular commenters” might also be read as referring to me by people who don’t know me. Considering that i am always very civil and that i have never exhibited rancor, i would appreciate if you could clarify that your admonitions for civility and your observations about rancor do not refer to me.

I used the word “rancor” because I detect a certain “bitterness or resentfulness, esp. when long-standing” that carries over from thread to thread between you, Ser-Jew, Mika, and Martin Maliette that tends to derail discussion of the topic at hand, this thread being a case in point. It was about a joke! What does it say about us as a community if we can become so completely unhinged over a joke?

I’m not apportioning blame here, its just an unfortunate dynamic that I’m pointing out that detracts from the quality of this blog, and I don’t want to get sucked into being the referee – I really hate that.

However, I will note that instead of taking the time to engage with me on my little contribution to the joke which is the topic of this thread, you instead chose to attempt to enlist me in your argument with Mr. Malliet. I’m not going to get involved, it would be ‘uncivil’, it’s also part of the group dynamic I don’t want to support.

I also note that, as far as I could tell, Mr. Malliet’s first comment at January 2, 2014 at 5:00 am was the first comment that really had anything to do with the subject of this post, everything else to that point and much afterwards was just the usual bickering – again, not wanting to apportion blame to anyone in particular, or choose sides.

Take this for what its worth, Mr. Malliet is the ‘regular’ I learn the most from, he’s older, better read, and speaks more languages than me. I learn a lot from you too Dioinissis, when you aren’t bickering with Martin Maliette, you have a different perspective, have read different things, and speak different languages than me. Fine. Lets keep it that way and everything will be groovy. All of this bickering is what Uncle Terrence would call a “bummmer.”

I say that your claims are a lie, and i challenge you to quote my comments in here where i have been uncivil and regularly rancorous. I claim you have no evidence and i claim you are a liar.

” I learn a lot from you too Dioinissis, when you aren’t bickering with Martin Maliette”

It only happened once in the past, and only after Martin Malliet repeatedly provoked me with comments about my “young” age, which to his mind made me less trustworthy. Therefore, your reference to “when you are not bickering with Martin Malliet” is one more slanderous attempt of yours to cast me as regularly engaging in off-topic quarrels.

“I also note that, as far as I could tell, Mr. Malliet’s first comment at January 2, 2014 at 5:00 am was the first comment that really had anything to do with the subject of this post, everything else to that point and much afterwards was just the usual bickering”

Mr Malliet’s comment about me was an unprovoked slander about my comments. My comments have been repeatedly praised by Dr Landes, so this alone suffices to prove that Mr Malliet was wrong. So it is obvious that you can’t note what is relevant to civil behavior – and a very important issue is not to attack people without provocation, like Malliet did to me, and like you are doing now to me in an attempt to slavishly earn Malliet’s sympathy.

“I used the word “rancor” because I detect a certain “bitterness or resentfulness,'”

You detected wrong, i was just defending preemptively myself from SerJew’s supremacist and vulgar attacks against me.

“esp. when long-standing” that carries over from thread to thread between you, Ser-Jew, Mika, and Martin Maliete that tends to derail discussion of the topic at hand, this thread being a case in point.”

No, you are lying, you spoke about rancor that is “habitually displayed”. And this shows that you are a liar because the only time that this has happened again was in the past, when i had to defend my trustworthiness against Malliet’s allusions to my “young” age. Nothing habitual and nothing rancorous about it, it was just temporary and rational self defense of me against Malliet.

“It was about a joke!”

No, it was not about a joke, it was about me preemptively making sure commenter SerJew would keep his sadistic supremacist attacks away from me. The rest, i.e. the interventions of Malliet and Sshender, were just unprovoked and slanderous ad hominems against me – that’s why they don’t dare contradict me when i say they are liars.

“What does it say about us as a community if we can become so completely unhinged over a joke?”

What does it say about you if you can’t understand what’s going on with the psychological dynamics of a situation, and yet you insist on getting entangled with it, and in a judgmental fashion on top of it all?

“However, I will note that instead of taking the time to engage with me on my little contribution to the joke which is the topic of this thread, you instead chose to attempt to enlist me in your argument with Mr. Malliet.”

You note wrong. I did not try to enlist you to anything, i just explained that, in light of what Malliet and sshender had said (slanders about me), readers would be thinking that your comment about rancor and civility was referring to me too. And i just asked you to clarify that you were not referring to me. But you were referring to me, after all, so how can you be so blatantly self-centered and expect me to engage you on your “little joke” when you have just slandered me as being habitually rancorous and uncivil?

You don’t live on planet Earth, do you?

“All of this bickering is what Uncle Terrence would call a “bummmer.””

No it wasn’t just bickering, it might have led to SerJew’s banning from the Elder of Ziyon blog, if i am guessing correctly:

Of course, he was banned “reluctantly”, as the Elder of Ziyon said, because it has become abundantly clear that the Elder has no problem with supremacism, but still the ramifications of the incident between SerJew and me seem to place it far away from what can be legitimately considered as “bickering”.

Wygart, why don’t you just steer clear from judging people when you haven’t understood what’s going on?

“I’m not apportioning blame here (…) and I don’t want to get sucked into being the referee (…).”

Wygart, what’s wrong with apportioning blame when the blame is deserved? And why should that make you the referee? I would think that civility is about upholding justice (order) between equals, with equals talking sense to each other, including blame when that makes sense.

In Dutch there is a pendant to the expression “stepping on someone’s toes” which is: “having long toes”. It is of course meant to counter complaints by over-sensitive narcissists having toes as long as it suits them. And not to admonish you to respect people’s imaginary toes.

This is all part of my investigation into narcissism. And I was wrong before, it’s not true that in the myth Narcissus could not see his own reflection in the pond, that must come from somewhere else, but I don’t know from where. It annoys me, because in my understanding the lack of substance and being unable to see yourself is at the heart of narcissism and explains the imaginary long toes.

My sister, who is having trouble with her grown-up children (age 23 and 25), is drawing my attention to Carol Dweck, some psychologist making furore with the earth-shattering insight that all that undeserved educational praise heaped on children makes them so afraid of not being perfect that they avoid challenging situations and stop learning. Teaching them some realism is coming back into fashion, I understand! One wonders where this confusion between ‘praise’ and ‘sweet talk’ comes from? From parents own narcissism? Which makes them unfit for love? What’s so difficult about taking your child in your arms while telling it very earnestly that is must stop being a pest? My Belgian grandfather knew how to do it! And he was entirely uneducated.

PS: From what I read in my newspaper (FAZ), the president of the European Parliament Martin Schulz, when speaking before the Knesset, not only supported Israel’s right to exist, but also its implication, the right to be left in peace. I found that quite remarkable, because I don’t think it happens very often. But fear of apportioning blame, I suppose, prevented him from going all the way, and to call the Palestinian leaders criminals if they don’t respect that right. Conclusion: fear of apportioning blame gets you into a muddle.

It doesn’t happen very often that a European politician so clearly recognizes not only Israel’s right to exist, but also the consequent right to be left in peace. Only, speaking responsibly would also require to call the criminals who disregard that right by name. Further in his speech, Martin Schulz calls “rocket attacks on innocent people” and “terrorist attacks” crimes, but continues to speak as if crimes could be committed without criminals. In this matter, people talk far too much, and far too imprecisely. No wonder that it then comes to a head.

Money talks. And there’s been lots of money from the EU via the Vatican/CIA criminal nexus to support the Jihadistani criminals in all their various criminal endeavors, from the criminal genocidal propaganda in the schools and media, to the criminal attempts at stealing Israeli/Judean nationality, to the criminal attempts at murder and mass murder.

The plan is always the same. Manipulate and position Jews onto indefensible grounds and then set them up for mass murder and genocide.

Wygart is the third one to spout a vague slander about me. The first two slanderers (Martin Malliet and sshender) referred directly to the lack of quality (according to them) of my past comments. Wygart went further and cast me as habitually rancorous and uncivil. All these accusations, if they were true, they would diminish my credibility and trustworthiness as a commenter. They are of course lies, but you know how it goes with mud: the more they throw it on you, the more some of it gets stuck on you. It means a lot to me to be taken seriously when i comment, so let me attempt once again to defend the quality of my past comments and my character by quoting Dr Landes’ praise for my past comments.

Dr Landes said to dionissis:

“i just glanced at the comments… more power to you. you have more energy than i.” (5 April 2013)

“thanks for your support” (6 April 2013)

“Thank u for your excellent comments” (18 April 2013)

“nice” (in response to a comment of mine on April 23, 2013)

“thank you for your responses to X … i did not have my eye on the ball, and you stepped in, quite ably…[we might arrange] a debate in London. if it happens, we’ll try and arrange for you [dionissis] to come.” (July 11, 2013)

Would Dr Landes have praised my comments in the above ways if he thought that my comments were of low quality?

Would Dr Landes have done so if i was a person “habitually rancorous” or “uncivil”?

Yet, that’s what the slanderers would have you believe about me – without even citing evidence (not that they could come up with anything, i am always civil and the quality of my comments is beyond dispute).

I modified the palestinian behaviour :
Accuses Ultra Orthodox Settlers of genetically modifying the flies, creating a species that drops only in palestinian cofee cups and poisoned with Polonium AIDS and sexual stimulating agents (aimed at youth corrupting). He denounces to the UN this flagrant genocide attempt commited this very Saturday…

As for the international community , they try to convince the israeli that he should give the cup to the palestinian because they were produced in a settelment they declared illegal.